4 ms·

They probably would be if they stopped using such shitty cameras. It always blows my mind that the cameras they use appear to be quite bad for the job. > in th

They probably would be if they stopped using such shitty cameras. It always blows my mind that the cameras they use appear to be quite bad for the job. > in the night Purpose-built cameras can see better in the dark than humans can.

wiz21c 5y ago
But we have a working brain to interpret those images.
- BugsJustFindMe 5y ago
  Your brain helps you with all kinds of things, but fundamental geometry is not magic. Reconstructing scene geometry from high quality binocular video is an extremely well developed field and has been for decades. The problem seems to be that Tesla overrelies on ML-based instantaneous pixel classification when you don't actually need to know what a large thing moving toward you is in order to not run into it.
- moralestapia 5y ago
  And this is supposed to imply what exactly?
mcguire 5y ago
"Cars driving at night are supposed to have headlights active." And yet...
ChuckNorris89 5y ago
>Purpose-built cameras can see better in the dark than humans can. Define "see better". Human eyes have way more dynamic range (30 f stops) than even the best cinema camera sensors (14 f stops), and I highly doubt the sensors Tesla use are anywhere close to the gigantic expensive sensors used in cinema cameras and are most likely closer to the sensors in your mobile phone (11 f stops). So no, no camera sensor can currently match the human eye, let alone the image processing and cognition our brains do on top.
- jjeaff 5y ago
  I can't find any source that puts the dynamic range of the human eye at 30 stops. The most i found was around 20. But camera apertures are often as low as f1.8 where the human eye is probably 2.5 to 3.5 at the lowest.
- BugsJustFindMe 5y ago
  First, I'm pretty sure I said "in the dark" and was responding to "in the night". Human eyes are extremely terrible at discerning actual details in low light compared to even moderate low light camera sensors. Second, diverting the conversation from low light performance to dynamic range is an unimportant tangent. Deciding that one sensor needs to cover the entire illumination range rather than multiple sensors each simultaneously capturing farther in each direction than we're capable of is an arbitrary unimaginative choice.

wiz21c 5y ago

But we have a working brain to interpret those images.

BugsJustFindMe 5y ago
Your brain helps you with all kinds of things, but fundamental geometry is not magic. Reconstructing scene geometry from high quality binocular video is an extremely well developed field and has been for decades. The problem seems to be that Tesla overrelies on ML-based instantaneous pixel classification when you don't actually need to know what a large thing moving toward you is in order to not run into it.
moralestapia 5y ago
And this is supposed to imply what exactly?

mcguire 5y ago

"Cars driving at night are supposed to have headlights active." And yet...

ChuckNorris89 5y ago

>Purpose-built cameras can see better in the dark than humans can. Define "see better". Human eyes have way more dynamic range (30 f stops) than even the best cinema camera sensors (14 f stops), and I highly doubt the sensors Tesla use are anywhere close to the gigantic expensive sensors used in cinema cameras and are most likely closer to the sensors in your mobile phone (11 f stops). So no, no camera sensor can currently match the human eye, let alone the image processing and cognition our brains do on top.

jjeaff 5y ago
I can't find any source that puts the dynamic range of the human eye at 30 stops. The most i found was around 20. But camera apertures are often as low as f1.8 where the human eye is probably 2.5 to 3.5 at the lowest.
BugsJustFindMe 5y ago
First, I'm pretty sure I said "in the dark" and was responding to "in the night". Human eyes are extremely terrible at discerning actual details in low light compared to even moderate low light camera sensors. Second, diverting the conversation from low light performance to dynamic range is an unimportant tangent. Deciding that one sensor needs to cover the entire illumination range rather than multiple sensors each simultaneously capturing farther in each direction than we're capable of is an arbitrary unimaginative choice.